Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

dustman81:People in the US are afraid of taking time off because they're afraid of being put on the cut list if the office is still functioning with them not there.

This. You take one or two days at a time, near a weekend if you work a Monday through Friday job, so you get a whole four days off in a row. (Insert hallelujah chorus here) No one will do your work while you are gone, so your job is secure if you can catch up the day you come back. Also, since the employer doesn't need a reason to fire or demote you (it's called "at-will" employment) most people don't take the chance at taking their entire vacation at once.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

You must work for a company that has a wonderful management team. Places like yours work tend to have very unhappy workers and high turnover rates. The worker isnt the problem, it's the the "leaders" from the lowest in the chain of command all the way to the top.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

I'm with ya on this one. And lets not forget bathroom breaks too. If you can't count on your employee to use the bathroom before they leave the house I doubt they have the discipline to to their job properly. In fact, I'm all for reducing or eliminating bathrooms in the workplace in favor of adding in another cubicle or two and increasing production.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

aerojockey:most Americans blow risk of retaliation in the workplace way out of proportion.

"Right to Work"/At-will employment means most people have zero job security.

Bad job market means that losing your job means it's next to impossible to get one to replace it.

Crap economy means most people don't have enough money on hand to support them without a job for any real length of time.

Of course people are going to be scared shiatless of retaliation for taking vacation time. The storm of lousy workers rights in the US, with a bad economy on top of that means the workers are exploited by the employers.

All the while we have politicians up there crooning on and on about how "Job Creators" are good virtuous people that power the economy. . .and all they give a fark about is how to make more money by probably firing people, outsourcing to India and China, and cutting wages and benefits.

Jesus, there are still people afraid of losing their jobs or not getting a promotion because they go out to eat lunch? Cripes, where do you poor souls work and WHY do you still work under those conditions???

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

No, it's not considered a luxury. It's considered career suicide.

You see, the rumors about overworked American workers are, indeed, true - when you can hire 3 developers in Bangalore for the price of a single developer in the United States, you have to figure out how to get your money's worth here

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

I'm with ya on this one. And lets not forget bathroom breaks too. If you can't count on your employee to use the bathroom before they leave the house I doubt they have the discipline to to their job properly. In fact, I'm all for reducing or eliminating bathrooms in the workplace in favor of adding in another cubicle or two and increasing production.

I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but there are companies here in the United States that do, in fact, limit bathroom breaks to 1 per day - 15 minutes total - and that any other breaks you may need are deducted from your paid time. I know, I worked one of those jobs, years ago. You had to punch out & in any time you stepped away from your station, for any reason.

See, here in the United States, your employer doesn't give a rat's ass about you - just what you can do for them. The lower you are in the market food chain, the less they have to care - if they could get away with pulling a Foxconn here, you'd see half the companies in America line up to take the early adopter seminar.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

My company requires every employee to take at least two consecutive weeks off every year. We have to certify with HR that we have done it and you need Sr. Executive approval to get the requirement waved. It is nice to know you have the block. Went to Spain last year.

seadoo2006:Jesus, there are still people afraid of losing their jobs or not getting a promotion because they go out to eat lunch? Cripes, where do you poor souls work and WHY do you still work under those conditions???

They work everywhere. And they work under those conditions because they like to eat and live indoors.Those of us who are fortunate enough to be in positions as secure as yours seems to be have forgotten that.

Here's a little story about being afraid to take time off from work. I've told it on Fark before, and got some. . .interesting. . .replies.

It was about 5 years ago. I was desperate for a job, and despite my degree the only job I could get was working in a warehouse. It was barely above minimum wage, 10 hour shifts, 6 days a week. 60 hour work-weeks. After two months of those 60 hour weeks, struggling to make high performance quotas (where if you have a bad day at work and underperform, you might get fired), I was tired, sore and sick. I was in no shape to work even at a desk job, much less a warehouse.

I had bruises, sprains, strains, and a lingering cough from the unheated warehouse. 10 hour workdays, combined with an hour-long commute each way meant I only barely had enough time to sleep, eat my food, bathe, then go back to work. The strain on my relationship with my fiancee was terrible on top of it all. My one day a week off was spent trying to rest and recover, and I was so exhausted I didn't have the energy to even do much with her. Not to mention that the job paid so little that we could barely pay the rent and afford food.

Every single non-management worker there was officially a temp. Thus us warehouse workers got no healthcare plan, no vacation time, no sick time, and were generally scared of calling in for any reason, and there was turnover rate that could only be called alarming. Well, the warehouse had a demerit-based attendance policy. Get too many and you're fired. I'd never called in, never been late to work, never left early, I'd always had 0 demerits.

I realized I could call in for a day or two, sandwich those two days between my scheduled day off, and try to take a few days to rest and recover, and maybe heal up some. A few hours before my shift was due to start, I called the call-in hotline and left my name, employee number and told them I was sick and couldn't be at work today.

I got a callback promptly, about 10 minutes later. Firing me. They said that I wouldn't be needed anymore, since other things in my life obviously meant more to me than work. I told them I had 0 attendance demerits and was sick enough that if I came in to work that day, I would not be able to make my quota between limping from sprains and bruises, and having to be in the bathroom so often hacking up phlegm due to my respiratory infection. They said that I was At-Will employee, so attendance points don't matter, I was fired, that's that.

The whole experience of those 2 months in that warehouse left me with a sharp appreciation of the plight of the working man and the working poor in America.

Last year, around this time, I told this story in a discussion thread involving OWS. Certain individuals jumped on to say that vacation time and sick leave are socialism and unfair to employers because why should people get paid for not working, and I was right to be fired because anybody who ever calls in to work before 90 days on the job should be fired immediately (never mind the 60+ hour workweeks for months on end and their physical toll). Basically I got misanthropic sociopaths like xl5150 saying that I was the bad guy for not working myself to death for the good of the company and being an obedient wage-slave.

That's where I went from sympathizing with the working man, to hating corporate management with zeal and passion.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

I'm with ya on this one. And lets not forget bathroom breaks too. If you can't count on your employee to use the bathroom before they leave the house I doubt they have the discipline to to their job properly. In fact, I'm all for reducing or eliminating bathrooms in the workplace in favor of adding in another cubicle or two and increasing production.

And don't even get me started on this whole idea of "lunch breaks"! I mean, I understand that many states "require" them after a certain number of hours worked, but is it really that hard to take care of your nutritional needs on your own time? Try waking up a few minutes earlier, since we'll still need you to start at 8am sharp. In fact, it would be best if you came in a few minutes early so you don't have to waste precious minutes on the clock doing things like "logging in" and so forth.

Nutrition is a matter of personal responsibility, and you can't simply expect everyone from your boss to the CEO to cater to YOUR needs... I mean, do you even want to move up in this company?

Nogale:Vacations are arranged ahead of time and there's NO reason why people can't get together and decide who will cover their colleague's responsibilities while they're away.

What's more problematic, actually, are sick days - I'm by no means saying that people shouldn't take them if necessary, and obviously you can't know ahead of time when you'll be ill - but especially in task-oriented workplaces, a worker suddenly deciding not to show up can certainly throw a wrench in things. More so when it's shift work and last-minute coverage requires juggling several people's schedules.

Here's a good observation: Many of our less-fortunate citizens work in minimum wage, fast-food work. It is a health department violation to employ people who are contagiously sick. These same jobs have no sick time and often, if you call in sick it is a demerit or a firing offense (it was in college at a certain fast food chain I worked for). So, you have the unfortunate fact that sick people come to work and working with your food (happens in nicer restaurants, too, and not just fast food joints).

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

I hope to never work for you. I get the feeling my tenure under you would end with one of us dead.

No, in any professional environment, it'd end with that chucklehead getting fired at his first performance review for exposing the company to an employer retaliation lawsuit. If your employer provides vacation time and you use that vacation time in an approved manner, attempting to "get rid of them" would actually be an ethical violation. In some states, like California, that's an ass-whupping for the employer. In other states, like Massachusetts, it can be damned hard to prove employer retaliation. Either way, though, most employers worth their salt don't take having some pissant manager exposing the company to unexpected liability, and so it looks better for the employer to fire the pissant manager than it does firing an employee that took approved vacation time.

xl5150:If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

If your team can't function because someone took two weeks off for vacation, then your team is run like ass.

If your team can function when someone takes two weeks off, but you then assume that means you can do without that person at all, then your team is run like ass. That's like saying "I was OK for two weeks with zero savings, so that must mean I don't need savings at all!" You need some excess capacity to allow for vacations, sickness, and voluntary turnover, just like you need money set aside for a rainy day. Both are the responsible thing to do.

The most I've ever had for paid time off was a week- but you had to work to accumulate it. Therefore, your first year working, you had literally no paid time off. I've worked in IT for ten years now. I've never had a job where I could take more than a day off at once without fearing retaliation, or actually receiving retaliation. This thread is so farking depressing and reminds me how my parents are constantly telling me "just get a good job, just become a manager".I don't have a choice about picking a 'good' one, any job will do.Every time I freaking call...

One day, I want a job where I can take a whole week off at once. I can't even imagine how cool that would be.

Silverstaff:aerojockey: most Americans blow risk of retaliation in the workplace way out of proportion.

"Right to Work"/At-will employment means most people have zero job security

Zero legal job security. In reality, your bosses (usually) aren't looking to fire people on the turn of a dime, even if they have a legal right to. In fact it's far more common for management to tolerate bad hiring decisions for awhile because of the cost of hiring and training replacements.

You, and most Americans, are overestimating your chances of losing your jobs, you are seriously overestimating the effect of things like taking a vacation will have on losing your jobs, and the amount you make yourselves miserable trying to hang onto that job is way out of proportion to your actual chances of losing it.

xl5150:moefuggenbrew: Got denied two days off by my boss, who just got back from 2 months in Sweden.

Then work hard, apply yourself, and become a boss. Your boss went to Sweden because he's the boss, not the worker. Once you've accomplished enough to be in charge you can reward yourself with time off if you deem that you have deserved it. Until then, it's your boss's call.

That's bullshiat. There's people who are wired to be managers and there's people who are wired to be code monkeys. I'm the kinda guy you put in a room with a list of problems to be solved and you shove food under the door once or twice a day and eventually out pops a solution. I don't manage people, I don't do employee reviews, I don't sign time cards, I don't log shiat in 15 minute intervals in time management system, I solve problems.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

Yeah, like sysadmins. If the servers don't fail when they're gone for more than a few days then you really don't need 'em. The sysadmins that are always working around the clock to fix crashes, keep those since they work harder.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

And the reasonable half of us are trying to stop the other half from destroying what's left of our unions. Of course, the people that will get farked the hardest right of the bat are the ones siding with the GOP and screeching about how unions are the devil.

We are a stupid bunch.

You start with 2 weeks/year where I work, and people think that's good. I think it goes to 3 weeks after maybe 7 years. I take it 2 days at a time to extend my weekends. And what's funny is management biatches about how often I take trips. However, if I ask for a full week off they biatch about how that's going to negatively impact my project timelines. Of course, we've got a division in Europe where people take entire months off at a time, and leave nothing but messages like "I'm on vacation. I'll be back __/__/____. Contact ________ if it can't wait." Things don't seem to fall apart over there.

If you give me vacation days, I'm going to use them all in the year. The same with sick days. I haven't gotten axed because of it yet. If you don't want your employees to use them, don't give them out.

xl5150:That will definitely stand out in management's mind the next time a round of layoffs come around.

that sounds lime the kind of company that won't stay in business to long or doesn't plan to grow at all. during a period of slow business and/or given enough time, management will be able to plan a temporary redistribution of the workload while the enployee is gone. just because it ends up working out temporarily doesn't mean that person isn't needed. it shows the rest of the employees can handle a temporary increase in workload. a permanent increase in workload might result increased errors in the long run.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

dustman81: People in the US are afraid of taking time off because they're afraid of being put on the cut list if the office is still functioning with them not there.

This. You take one or two days at a time, near a weekend if you work a Monday through Friday job, so you get a whole four days off in a row. (Insert hallelujah chorus here) No one will do your work while you are gone, so your job is secure if you can catch up the day you come back. Also, since the employer doesn't need a reason to fire or demote you (it's called "at-will" employment) most people don't take the chance at taking their entire vacation at once.

That's pretty much the way it has been for most places I've worked. Anyone who actually took two weeks off (consecutively) was put on both lists:

1. The company can function without you for two weeks.2. You are making so much you can afford to travel.

You may get made redundant for #1, or you simply stop getting raises for #2.

Better to use the vacation days one by one for things like getting errands done or going to the doctor.

Personally, I usually just end up with unused vacation time at the end of the year, because, quite honestly, I don't know what kind of travel I could even afford if I DID take 2 weeks off consecutively.

xl5150:moefuggenbrew: Got denied two days off by my boss, who just got back from 2 months in Sweden.

Then work hard, apply yourself, and become a boss. Your boss went to Sweden because he's the boss, not the worker. Once you've accomplished enough to be in charge you can reward yourself with time off if you deem that you have deserved it. Until then, it's your boss's call.

Just shows me his boss is nonessential. Hopefully executive management realizes this and fires him.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

People in the US are afraid of taking time off because they're afraid of being put on the cut list if the office is still functioning with them not there.

Yep. I'm not afraid of it myself because A. almost no one can do my job as well as I can, and B. even if they could, most Americans blow risk of retaliation in the workplace way out of proportion. So I happily take weeks off whenever I want, and if I'm out of paid time I'll just take unpaid time.

I believe B is a trait Americans pick up in our school system (which tries to crush out all questioning of authority), which is why it might not be seen in other countries as much. I usually roll my eyes when people generalize about "Americans" but our schools really are more soul-crushing than in other countries, especially in the early grades.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

Does nobody working for you take vacations out of state, much less out of the country? Sounds like a great place to work.

/gonnw be gone at least a week or two to take my fiancé to Greece for our honeymoon!

Slu:xl5150: Slu:My company requires every employee to take at least two consecutive weeks off every year. We have to certify with HR that we have done it and you need Sr. Executive approval to get the requirement waved. It is nice to know you have the block. Went to Spain last year.

Really? Is this now considered a luxury in the US? If so, that's pretty sad.

If someone was working for me and took two weeks off all at once, I would be sure to get rid of them at the next round of layoffs. If they're going to disappear for two weeks and leave the rest of us hanging, then that shows they're not devoted to the team and they can't be counted on. There are a lot of people out there looking for jobs and if someone isn't serious about their job it isn't hard to find someone who would take it seriously. If they take off for two weeks and things go smoothly while they're gone, then it's an indication that they're not that essential and there is no reason for them to be on the payroll since we can function just fine without them.

If you are doing what you love, then you don't need time off. I work with the mentally handicap at a state run facility here in Nevada. Today I gave a forty three year old man enough electric shock therapy to eject three fillings from his mouth. I don't need a vacation.

Really loving my 30 days/year right now. Though I do currently have about 45 in the bank. the free healthcare is pretty cool too.

One day when I'm 40, I'll retire and have to deal with the civilian world and its "benefits." That said, my fiancé is a teacher and gets TONS of time off, but doesn't make a whole lot. Between the two of us, we do OK.